1 comment
on commit b2a84f9

This comment has been minimized.

Discussed on #perl-faq already, but I'm not particularly happy with the mention of Dancer being "best used for small and tiny projects", as it carries the unwritten subtext of being unsuitable for anything beyond that.

Dancer's current implementation is somewhat limiting in some cases, hence the reason for Dancer 2 being close to completion (a complete re-write of Dancer's core, done properly, but still backwards compatible with Dancer's DSL), but I don't feel it's limiting enough that it means the current stable version of Dancer is no good beyond tiny apps.

Also, this mention means that, even after Dancer 2 has been released, anyone with a version of perl which included this perlfaq version will see Dancer being described as unsuitable for anything big, well after it has been replaced with a far more capable implementation.

Discussed on #perl-faq already, but I'm not particularly happy with the mention of Dancer being "best used for small and tiny projects", as it carries the unwritten subtext of being unsuitable for anything beyond that.

Dancer's current implementation is somewhat limiting in some cases, hence the reason for Dancer 2 being close to completion (a complete re-write of Dancer's core, done properly, but still backwards compatible with Dancer's DSL), but I don't feel it's limiting enough that it means the current stable version of Dancer is no good beyond tiny apps.

Also, this mention means that, even after Dancer 2 has been released, anyone with a version of perl which included this perlfaq version will see Dancer being described as unsuitable for anything big, well after it has been replaced with a far more capable implementation.